Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: orchiddoctor Date: Dec 19, 2006 6:42am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Wolfgang's Vault Faces Litigation

It does violate copyright law. If a performer or venue bans taping or filming, then you have agreed to that ban by entering the venue or attending the event. In the case of pro sports--another performance--you cannot disseminate the performances without permission. You cannot photograph art in a musuem without permission. Permission is the key word.
The Dead crew used to cut mic lines in the early days. No meant no. And just because the fish has been removed from the stream and placed into the pond doesn't make catching it legal.

Truth be told, that doesn't stop folks from doing so; and I don't think that Bob Dylan is out there saying smash all the little bugs who dare sneak a recorder in and share a copy with a friend. The Dead broadcast shows in the Fall of 1971 in each market--partially paid for by Warner's. Great advertising (and great for collectors).

Very few performers care if you tape. And if it is broadcast, it is out there. But if an artist makes a sbd and does not wish it to be passed on or copied, that is their right--no grey area here. They played, they taped, they own.

The issue here falls into the following question: did the artists know BGP was taping, and did they consent? If they consented, did they agree to allow the music to be disseminated? If so, did they agree to allow it to be posted on a commercial for profit site? Maybe yes on the first one or two--but not beyond.

There is another issue: much of this was done back in the day when trades were made slowly and quietly. Now, it's all done with the press of a button, a thousand at a time.
When cds came out, all previous contracts had to be renegotiated. Electronic reproduction: a two sided sword.

What abput stolen tapes? Does that make them legal--being "freed" by theft? If I let you photograph me, does that mean that you can do whatever you wish with the photos? If I tape a rehearsel that is shitty, does that mean you can sneak a copy and embarass me in front of the whole cybercrowd? Can I follow you around and record your doings and put them on line without your knowledge or consent? Can I create a work of art and ask that you not tape or photograph it and pass it on? Can I create a work of art and say it is my creation, my intellectual property and forbid you to use it, copy it, or otherwise disseminate it. Yes, I can. That's what copyright law is for.

Please note a loophole. Copyright protection does eventually expire--only so many renewals and it falls into the public domain.

While I would argue that there is or was no harm in trading material that made its way into the underground, I would argue that posting it online is another issue altogether, a tricky issue with no simple answers. Same questions: intent and reality.

And, only someone with total disrespect for the artist would argue that someone could take tapes made privately and clandestinely with no intent to distribute and place them on for profit websites. Sure, there's no charge for listening, but you can download them if you know how. And it's a ply to get you to buy merchandise. Is is commercial, and that is over the line in both spirit and law. If you care about the musicians, then you will understand the problem.

Wolfgang is not a site like arhive or dime or etree or shnflac. They are places where the tribe can gather and share electronically. And if an artist wants his material removed, it is done so immediately. That is copyright law at work. Read the Dead's statement, read Pearl Jam's, read dozens of others.

Something isn't yours because you say it is. You cannot steal my furniture, you cannot steal my music. You cannot walk into my nursery and take an orchid nor can you take pictures without permission. You cannot jump on a woman's body and force yourself on her. Bad analogies? No. Those who steal from artists rape them.

Respect the artists' wishes, or disrespect the artist.

The choice is yours.


That being said, a lot of great 1969 stuff seeding now on shnflac.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 19, 2006 7:41am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Wolfgang's Vault Faces Litigation

Agree with much of what you say; my point of quibble is with the term 'my music,' as I see a performance as just that: the performer and the crowd enter into an agreement to be there that at some level implies consent for sharing. I can take my memory, and if I taped from the soundboard with permission at the time, that too. I agree that soundboards produced entirely by the crew and the band are the property of the band.

I just see that the connection between the crowd and the performer in a concert setting is more substantive than it is for a painting, stage production or a football game. A fine line and a slippery slope to be sure.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: tigerbolt Date: Dec 19, 2006 7:53am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Wolfgang's Vault Faces Litigation

true wt,hey did the dvd-audio thread help?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Dec 19, 2006 9:10am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Wolfgang's Vault Faces Litigation

Absolutely...cannot wait to find out my shns and CDs are a thing of the past and I have to burn a whole new set of materials for the new age dawning...

Hey--maybe I can sue someone for the implication that my downloads had value (implied because they limit my access) when burned as CDs with wavs.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Earl B. Powell Date: Dec 19, 2006 7:58am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Wolfgang's Vault Faces Litigation

OD...Here, the devil is in the details. As you say, it lies the contractual language between the bands and BGP.

There are two things that have not been mentioned here. First, is that as the Producer, like a movie producer for example, Graham had certain rights that may superceed the rights of the performer, since it was his investment at risk.

Second, and perhaps more importantly, these concerts were largely produced before Al Gore invented the internet. Fact is, that the bands and BGP had no clear vision of the available technology in 2006. At the time it may have been fairly easy to cede performance rights, as the subsequent marketing and distribution costs for these shows would be significant compared to today.


Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)